[DiegoNaval]

Originally Posted by unilord

Hey,

I have surpassed the difficulties of the pre-processing. However, I am running the analysis with the MRF approach, and it seems to be an "aureola" where the MRF cell zone is, as you can see in the picture below. Does anyone have any idea why this could be happening?

Dear Pedro,
The disturbs found by you are due to the velocity flux (seen as a surface vector field) computed in the two zones (within the MRF and out of it). From a mathematical point of view, it assumes different values inside and outside the MRF region. These values are coincident only if the cell's surface (seen as an interface) has a normal vector orthogonal to the imposed motion (in your case, it should be cylindrical). Otherwise, the phi value and the velocity field are not consistent seen from inside and outside the MRF zone.

I hope to have clarified the problem,

Diego

[DiegoNaval]

Originally Posted by unilord

Hey,

I have surpassed the difficulties of the pre-processing. However, I am running the analysis with the MRF approach, and it seems to be an "aureola" where the MRF cell zone is, as you can see in the picture below. Does anyone have any idea why this could be happening?

Dear Pedro,
The disturbs found by you are due to the velocity flux (seen as a surface vector field) computed in the two zones (within the MRF and out of it). From a mathematical point of view, it assumes different values inside and outside the MRF region. These values are coincident only if the cell's surface (seen as an interface) has a normal vector orthogonal to the imposed motion (in your case, it should be cylindrical). Otherwise, the phi value and the velocity field are not consistent seen from inside and outside the MRF zone.

I hope to have clarified the problem,

Diego

[unilord]

Originally Posted by DiegoNaval

Dear Pedro,
The disturbs found by you are due to the velocity flux (seen as a surface vector field) computed in the two zones (within the MRF and out of it). From a mathematical point of view, it assumes different values inside and outside the MRF region. These values are coincident only if the cell's surface (seen as an interface) has a normal vector orthogonal to the imposed motion (in your case, it should be cylindrical). Otherwise, the phi value and the velocity field are not consistent seen from inside and outside the MRF zone.

I hope to have clarified the problem,

Diego

Hey Diego,

Thanks, it was clarified completely. By using a cylindrical mesh we grant a relative "orthogonality" between the cells immediately before and after the MRF interface. However, does a regual mesh mean worse results than the cylindrical one?

[DiegoNaval]

Originally Posted by unilord

Hey Diego,

Thanks, it was clarified completely. By using a cylindrical mesh we grant a relative "orthogonality" between the cells immediately before and after the MRF interface. However, does a regual mesh mean worse results than the cylindrical one?

It is not a problem of quality, but it is related to how you solve your equations (or better, how you discretize them). The interface between the two zones has to be considered carefully to be consistent with the considered hypothesis.
Anyway, if the orthogonally is not too high, the solution converges properly.